Enough with the “familiar” references to U.S. Senate wannabe Elizabeth Warren’s life story!

Two months ago (as the hardworking staff duly noted) it was a Boston Globe report that included this:

In an hourlong interview, [Warren] spoke often of the now-familiar story of her humble roots in Oklahoma.

Yesterday it was Globe columnist Adrian Walker’s turn, chronicling a Warren campaign rally at the Reggie Lewis Track and Athletic Center in Roxbury:

Once she reached the podium, Warren recited her increasingly familiar rise from poverty to the faculty of Harvard.

The hardworking staff will say it again:

Ask ten people in the 351 cities and towns of Massachusetts about Elizabeth Warren and 1) 98% won’t know who she is; 2) 99.99% won’t know the first thing about her.

That’s how familiar Warren’s story is. To all appearances, this is news coverage by the chin-strokerati for the politerati. Which, to all appearances, is all too prevalent.

Cut to: Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, which featured a piece on the high-profile nature of the Scott Brown/Elizabeth Warren Senate bakeoff.

Nut graf:

The race pits two nationally known candidates who have been elevated to prominence by separate populist waves. Mr. Brown, propelled by tea-party activists, scored an upset win in a special election in early 2010, capturing the seat long held by Democrat Edward Kennedy. Ms. Warren, a Harvard Law School professor and prominent consumer-finance watchdog, has tapped into the anti-Wall Street sentiment that is illustrated by the world-wide “Occupy” protests.

Of course, by “nationally known” the Journal means known to the – wait for it – chin-strokerati.

3 Responses to This Is What’s Wrong With The News Media’s Political Coverage (II)

I wouldn’t go as far as to say that Warren has been lifted by a populist wave, although there is a certain shrillness to her campaign that is trying to put her there and a newspaper that is miffed that Sen. Brown sits in the Teddy Kennedy Memorial Senate Seat.